clear_plate

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden for what is a destructive bulk deletion. It never states that removal is irreversible, that there is no undo or confirmation, or whether all plates or only the active bed are affected.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, appropriate for a zero-argument action. It is terse to the point of omitting operationally important detail, but nothing in it is wasted.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a destructive, irreversible, no-argument bulk operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin. An agent cannot tell what exactly gets cleared, what state results, or how it differs from the single-object sibling.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline for a parameterless tool applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Specific verb 'Remove' plus explicit scope 'every object from the bed' makes the operation immediately identifiable. It does not explicitly contrast with the sibling remove_object, so the agent must infer that this is the bulk variant.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No when-to-use guidance and no exclusion or alternative named, even though the sibling remove_object handles the single-object case. The agent gets no signal about which of the two removal tools to pick.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.